Anchored Putters Rules Change (Effective January 1, 2016) - Page 46

 

You and me both.  Maybe California just doesn't have many hardcore golfers? 

 

 

You're smarter than this, or you're just resorting to flat out bull**** at this point.  Either way, it's beneath you.

I played yesterday, and saw a kid two groups behind us, probably 12 years old, using a belly putter - as a long putter, by anchoring it into his chest.

I wanted to ask him why he was anchoring, but instead I decided to hit a 285yd bomb up the fairway with my 460cc driver.

Much ado about nothing. Tim Finchem is just doing his job but, in the end, he will abide by whatever the USGA and R&A decide. And I'm pretty sure they will decide to institute the ban.

 

Side note, I was watching the golf yesterday and I am intrigued by Kuchar's method (shaft up the left arm). I may give that a try this spring.

 

 

All make compelling points...and maybe we should ban slow play! 

 

IMO, the controversy is all about the money...and it's not all about the actual Tour Players but also about the OEMs that are sponsoring the Tour Players...I have stated this before...

 

The groove rule was a win-win for many people. The USGA won whatever they think they won and the OEMs sold a ton of wedges and opened a new wedge market. They pumped out the old wedges to those who wanted to stockpile and then sold the new conforming wedges to those who needed to conform or wanted to conform. When the dust settled nothing really came of it because it didn't make that much difference on Tour, there were no Karsten battles to fight, and OEMs did just fine. 

 

With the anchor stroke ban, it would kill a blossoming market (TM says 15% of putter sales) and not provide a replacement product because every person who has come on board with an anchored putter most likely has a traditional putter (probably a few) in the garage. All this really does is kill a portion of the OEM's sales. 

 

Now if we are talking about what is best for golf and not about the money behind it I would say the best reason not to ban is because it has been allowed for a long time. Even Paul Runyun, in a book published in 1979, advocated the split hand method that shoved the butt in the belly. The best reason to ban is that it is really not a stroke, it is an aberration that has been allowed to exist and is not in the same spirit as any other allowable stroke. 

Funny, I spent 10 minutes trying to find the other guy you were referring to in the other post of yours I quoted below and only found this.  Thoroughly confused wondering why you were referring to yourself in the third person, then I finally found NM's quote. :)

 

I agree with you both.

 

Again, neither of them are saying they are the same thing, and that golf is as important as human rights, just that the arguments are the same.

 

"It doesn't affect me at all but I don't like the way you do things and I don't think it should be allowed."  Which one was I referring to there?

Ah, here is the quote Stretch was referring to. ;)  Sometimes I think that it would be a really good idea if the website was able to include a post number in the box of a post that is quoted, therefore it's easier to find if you want to read the rest of it or quote it yourself. :)

 

Yeah, that's how I took it too.

 

Also, I don't believe that he was suggesting at all that if you were anti-anchoring then you HAD to also be anti gay marriage.

 

And the side saddle line straddle ban* is a precedent imo.

 

* i'm not sure of the actual term for that type of putting stroke

 

And yet, Odyssey and Titleist came out early supporting the ban.  I imagine that Odyssey sells one or two long putters too.

Equate? Of course not. But show a similarity...yes. They are similar because gay marriage is basically being banned because people in power don't like the look of it. Its that simple, someone doesn't think its right so they ban it. No evidence mind you just a gut feeling.

 

 

Being the fact I play under USGA rules I only care about the USGA. If I move to Europe I will take up the fight with the R&A.

 

The people that fight gay marriage probably feel the same way. They are not necessarily bad people they are just forcing the way they believe onto another person. Again, no proof not statistical data showing its bad, just a feeling they have.

 

 

No of course not that would be ridiculous. Nor am I saying in any way that the ban on anchored putters is as important as someones human right to marry whom they choose. I am just showing the similarities between the two arguments.

Equipment makers resist any rule which limits their ability to innovate and market their stuff, pros resist any rule which they feel impacts players potential earnings, especially players already on tour. Their claims that they have the best interests on the game in mind is just lipstick on a pig, self serving bs. The justification that it has been to long is equally bs. Correcting an error, even belatedly is the right thing to do. Anchoring the putter is contrary to the basic nature of the game. It never should have been allowed, outlawing it is the proper action.

 

Sounds like Odyssey changed it's position:

 

“We don’t agree with (the proposed rule), but we’ll accept it,” said Austie Rollinson, Odyssey’s principal designer. “We see it as an opportunity to innovate within the new conforming standards being imposed.”

 

http://golfweek.com/news/2013/feb/19/potential-ban-has-damaged-sales-long-belly-putters/

 

and then they came up with a way to try to expand a market that is all but withering away with this Kuchar inspired design: 

 

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golftalkcentral/odyssey-responds-to-anchor-ban-with-new-putter/

 

As far as putter companies supporting the ban, I think they painted an optimistic tune but I don't see support. 

 

http://blogs.golf.com/equipment/2012/11/putter-makers-react-to-the-pending-anchored-putter-ban.html

 

 

Titleist: From Joseph J. Nauman, Executive Vice President, Corporate and Legal, Acushnet Company

“We intend to review the announcement regarding anchoring issued today by the USGA and R&A and, as a matter of process, appreciate the opportunity to provide comments to them during the comment period.”

If this is support then I must be missing the point. 

 

Odyssey:

 

 

 

 

I don't remember which forum I read the Acushnet response on but it was actually quite positive.  They aren't going to be hurt by this anyway.  With all of the possibilities in putter design, I don't see them having any trouble finding new ways to separate golfers from their money.  All they seem to have to do is put a new label on the same old clubs and call it the 2013 model and people rush to buy them.  

 

Golfers have to be just about the biggest spendthrifts in any sport I can think of.  They will buy a new $300, $400, $500 driver every year and think nothing of it, even though the actual performance differences are minimal.  I had a friend who never finished the season with the same driver he began with, yet his game never really changed (low single digit handicap).   Amateur photographers are similar, have to have the latest and greatest body or lens, even though it does nothing to change the quality of the photos they take.  

 

Once you have quality gear, any real improvements are in technique, not equipment.

 

This is true and it is not real hard either. All it takes is for a guy to miss a crucial 3 footer and it's off to the pro shop for some new magic. 

 

 

 

 

1.  He never said they were "the same".  He said they were very similar.

2.  The Rules of Golf are arbitrary rules for a game we (mankind?) invented.  They have absolutely nothing to do with human rights, or civil liberties, or actual LAW.  Well, except that laws are arbitrary rules that we (mankind) invented and they're SO arbitrary that many vary depending on the city, county, state or country you live in.

 

To say that it's not similar and to forget that the process is nearly identical.  We elect representatives to create laws that we HOPE will be based on the needs and desires of the people.  In the same way we elect officers in the USGA with the HOPE that they will govern in a way that will promote the game while protecting its integrity as a sport.

 

Marriage laws are simply arbitrary laws created by society.  The age at which you can marry without parental consent varies widely throughout the world.  The requirements for marriage also vary (in Missouri I had a three-day-waiting period).  And just as the marriage laws differ, so do the divorce laws.

 

Marriage isn't a "human right".  Choosing to live your life with whomever you wish is a human right.  The "rights" that go along with marriage (you know, like the right to all of their possessions if they should die) are arbitrary laws that man created.  Marriage is a legal condition created by marriage laws.  It's a piece of paper.  Your COMMITMENT to your partner, no matter what sex they are, is what matters.  Not some piece of paper.  The only reason marriage is even an issue to homosexuals is because we've created so many MORE arbitrary laws that give benefits to people who get that piece of paper and they want those benefits as well.

 

But if you think that laws are somehow completely different than rules of a sport that were created by an elected, governing body, then I think you're reaching.

I must have clicked on the wrong thread. Thought this one was about anchoring putters.

 

 

 

I know it may seem irrelevant, but the fact is USGA rules are made in much the same way as any governing body makes rules/laws.  That was the point.  And just as some of us have stated, what PREVIOUS presidents/boards did shouldn't be a factor when it comes to making/changing rules.  That'd be like saying that because 20 years ago the U.S. president supported this or that means that future presidents have to carry the same stance (which is basically the argument SOME are trying to make when it comes to banning the anchored stroke now).

 

The term "human right" doesn't really have any legal meaning in this country, but the term "fundamental right" does.  Of the right to marry, the Supreme Court has said "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival."  It receives the highest level of protection; the same as your right to vote.

 

 

 

I think the competitive advantage argument is overblown.  There are plenty of things are forbidden by the rules of golf that don't necessarily provide an advantage.  Its about preserving what the golf "should" be, which as Finchem said, is totally subjective.  

Many of us have said that we almost never see anchorers out there on the course ... and I'm in that group.  To be fair, though, I think we can really only be talking about people who are either A) playing in our foursome, or B) playing with a broomstick.  Belly putters are pretty darn hard to see at a distance because the putting stroke looks the same, and those seem to be the ones on the trend up.

 

While I would still contend that the number of users out there is very, very small, maybe it's not quite as small as I was originally thinking.  I've never seen a belly putter being used on the course is probably not a true statement.  I should revise it to I've never noticed one being used.